Check out that link. This guy exposes a few websites for posting reviews of Zombi U even though they possibly barely played the game. Who knows how often this happens.

I think reviewers should be required to say how long, or how far, they played into a game when they review it. Possibly post a picture of themselves next to a tv that has the games end credits running. I just don't think some reviewers always give games the proper time and attention that they deserve. It's not only unprofessional but it potentially hurts the hard work a developer puts into a game by hurting sales.

lemmywinks= ultra fanboy .

Wow...thanks for your insight. Welcome to Blocksville!

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Haha... come on, shaunme. You're supposed to be upset, or sad, or angered, or otherwise moved, or give half-a-s*** that a child just put you on their ignore list.

Most people know that reviewers seldom play the entirety of the game. It's fairly obvious just from reading/watching their review.

Riight, so someone who has reviewed a game in less than 5 minutes has played the game to completion? i don't think so.---UK Female Gamer PC specs: AMD FX BULLDOZER 4100 QUAD CORE 4.0ghz ATI HD6670 8GB RAM 1TB HDD Youtube http://www.youtube.com/user/HUYI1

Most people know that reviewers seldom play the entirety of the game. It's fairly obvious just from reading/watching their review.

I'll fix that for you.

Most people know that BAD reviewers seldom play the entirety of the game. It's fairly obvious just from reading/watching their review.

As a reviewer myself (been with gamerstemple.com for nearly seven years now), I can tell you this - its only the laziest of reviewers who don't play most of or the entire game before writing an opinion.

It can be tough to balance. People want games they look forward to reviewed on or before launch, and not all reviewers get advanced copies of every single game coming out. We got a lot, but not all. Contrast that with the reviewers (like myself) who feel it's important to play most of or all of a game before putting fingers to keyboard and you've got a sometimes impossible situation.

Luckily the site I work for emphasizes playing the whole game before reviewing it. Sure, we're a little late with some reviews (I just finished my Dragonborn review yesterday), but at least readers always know we didn't just pop the game in, play for a half-hour and write a review. I feel sacrificing immediacy for quality is a good trade-off, but not everyone agrees.

People tore me apart for my extremely negative review of Resistance: Burning Eyes.. I mean Skies... on the Vita. The game sucked big time. But with all the complaints, no one ever said I accused me of not playing through the whole thing. I did play the whole game - granted, it was torture - but I wouldn't be comfortable writing ANY review, good, bad or really bad, if I hadn't given the whole thing a fair shot. It would be like Roger Ebert watching the first 20 minutes of a movie and leaving the theater to write it up.

Simply saying reviewers seldom play games is a completely false and foolish blanket statement, and it proves simple ignorance on how the majority of reviewers operate.---Never, EVER order ANYTHING from ConsoleSource.com. EVER. You have been warned.

Do you guys google random crap to try and use here, and then settle for any garbage site ever that comes up?

coffeewithgames... lol.

This.

It reminds me of how a friend of mine desperately wanted Dirge of Cerberus to be a good game. After reading about a dozen reviews that gave it 5s and 6s, she finally found some random ass reviewer that none of us had ever heard of before that gave it a 7. And she clung to that as justification for her now putting on her shoes to run out and buy it.

Hilarious the lengths people will go to in an attempt to stay in denial.---If Platinum was HAND drawn, she'd be on paper, fool. This is a video game. They just made her on screen, no "drawing" involved -Delano7 on BlazBlue

Most reviewers didn't "beat" Skyrim before they reviewed it, and their reviews echo the users reviews. Beating a game is not required to review it.---Do you play Dragon's Dogma? Try out my pawn, she'll take care of you! Name: EhcinXbox GT/PSN- Ssur Trebor

That is why i like angry joes reviews, he plays through the game till completion THEN he expresses his opinion on the game unlike ign who are fueled by money and nothing else, on top of that i hate when someone reviews a game in 5 minuites, its impossible to review a game in such a small period.

Except IGN DOES complete their games before reviewing them, and contrary to popular belief IGN is comprised of human beings that genuinely enjoy games. They're not just a soulless corporation with an agenda.---I'm just dickin aroouunnndSHAKE AND BAKE!